The old rent issues - the other side of the coin

We have allowed more than enough time to pass and it is now imperative that an explanation from some, not all, of those living in low rent homes is heard.

We have lived in a low rent home for over 50 years and it might surprise some if we state that, yes, something has to be done about these low rent homes, which will be just and fair to all concerned. This is a point that I do not recall hearing or reading from anyone.

There is no doubt that there is abuse in this matter and we are very much in favour that matters are looked into and remedied. It is intolerable to hear about people living in low rent homes who expect the owners to make major repairs and not expect to pay anything. Worse still, when people can afford much, much more.

But we cannot accept being lumped into one group of people who are making life very difficult for owners. This is not right and completely unacceptable.

Although we live in a low rent home, we have spent a lot of money on improving the house. We also never charge the owners for any works done, minor or major, which again has cost us a lot but we deem this to be fair on everyone, and we certainly do not regret it.

For those who might be interested to know, we describe our relation with the owner(s) as "can't be better". Having said this, it is also very true that, being normal human beings, we do not know what lies in store in the future. Another reason for this article.

In 1997 I wrote to the Commission entrusted to look into the matter and make recommendations, putting forward my points and suggestions. I received an acknowledgement and nothing else.

On January 9, 2004, I wrote to Minister Dolores Cristina repeating the points I made. Her secretary informed me, and I quote: "The Commission set up in 1997 never finalised its report.

"Dr Peter Grech, who was a member of that Commission, and is now Deputy Attorney General, was entrusted by Minister Cristina to elicit major findings of the Commission's workings."

I believe Dr Grech did present Minister Christina with a report. Quite obviously, I do not know what the report's contents are, but I am a bit sceptical about it on one point. Was there any consultation by anyone about the matter? We were never consulted to start with, and this makes the report, in our view, faulty.

A few letters have appeared in the past from people living in low rent homes agreeing that something needs to be done and matters rectified - again, provided this is fair to all. As expected, no one wrote to say this is a good starting point worth attention. Why?

Is it, as we suspect, that it does not suit those who are clamouring for the total removal of the old rent laws?

Please permit me to ask what we think are a few relevant questions on the matter:

How can one explain the mushrooming of so many official and unofficial estate agents? And even as I write, more are being established.

A good number of these have beautiful offices, a good number of staff and produce lovely brochures. Nothing wrong with this, of course. But isn't this a clear sign of a certain well-being?

How can one explain people leaving good, well paid jobs for property and real estate? Is it because it is a gold mine?

How come people selling such things as boats sometimes advertise part exchange for property? Why do some well established companies find it worth their while to have branches in real estate when their main line of business has nothing to do with it?

Are the present prices fair and realistic? No we do not expect them to be pegged to the past, but surely the increases and the pricing are far too steep.

How many new dwellings being built are still vacant? Aren't these a burden all round?

We believe there are something like 40,000 empty dwellings. What is the reason for it? Please don't tell us that it's not worth renting out.

Why are a number of hotels, including those in the five-star category, being closed down or demolished to be changed into apartments, flats or old people's homes?

Does anyone know how many foreigners come to buy property and leave without doing so. One reason being the prices asked?

How many dwellings have been repossessed because the new owners simply could not afford more payments?

How can one explain apartments or flats costing six figures but the garage or garage space is optional?

Mention such things as a penthouse, farmhouse, room (only room) for a swimming pool, thank goodness not for a pony yet, in some much sought after area (sic) and you can expect to have to fork out a lot of money.

Sought after areas? May I mention just two? Ta' Xbiex, which has been declared a red light district, and Madliena with the noise problem!

How can one explain this frenzy to demolish houses, well intentioned people are invited to give up, and build apartments and flats?

Did you notice the latest? Do you own the air space? Developers will build on this!

What chance have engaged couples/first time buyers got of buying a place to live in reasonably priced homes? Isn't it a shame when you hear some of these say that they can't even afford having their first child because of the repayment burdens they have?

I remember meeting a person 20 years ago who was involved in the building trade. He told me he had just taken Lohombus to task for, as he said, "crucifying first time buyers" with their charges and conditions. What is the situation now?

What chances has anyone got of renting reasonable priced, unfurnished premises? None. First because they do not exist and second because with the prices asked it simply is not worth renting but buying.

How many properties are on the market to buy or rent which can be describes as substandard? Yet the owners are free to ask for prices, take it or leave it.

In the case of liberalisation, what will happen if owners decide, because they are now free to do so, to evict tenants, even if these are the most careful ones and never gave the owners any problems? Who is going to be held responsible for this state of affairs?

Is the sort of house and its locality of any importance to anyone? Shouldn't it be obvious that there are dwellings and dwellings which must be taken into consideration?

Do you remember what was said and written about Dar Malta in Brussels? Taking everything into consideration, shouldn't we agree that comparisons are not odious at all and that Government did a good job to buy that property?

It has been stated that single parents are among those who would need to rent property. What chances have they got of doing so? None.

Why is so much being given as an incentive to people to leave their homes so that they can be developed?

Did anyone notice some rental prices for a single-car garage? Three figures per month?

Is paying a lot of money, sometimes six figures, just for the land or to buy a property on plan acceptable? Again, is paying a lot for a "shell only" dwelling acceptable?

I remember watching a satellite TV station called Wishline, which has stopped transmitting. Its purpose was selling luxury cars, yachts and property. I used to enjoy comparing property prices and what was offered, and there was much to be learnt from it.

Over a certain period of time I have spoken to people who left their homes because the incentives were not to be refused but they still lament the efforts put in their homes, only for everything to be reduced to rubble.

Let's be honest with ourselves. Malta and Gozo have been taken over by developers. We should know; we have been living in the development hell called Sliema for the best part of our lives and are still in a long, dark tunnel with no hope of the light at the end of it.

Everyone is free to do what they wish, thank God, but has anyone ever questioned why so many houses are being demolished in favour of building flats, for example? Has anyone ever considered what is being offered and at what price? Isn't it a fact that most of those living in flats own just about nothing except the space they live in?

Yes indeed, high rise buildings and flats make sense in that we simply cannot continue building outwards and apartments, flats, maisonettes, etc. are good because they are flat! But from what we see and are told, we are not that keen on living in one.

Some time ago I mentioned the fire danger in such property. Let me mention just one episode: the Ta' Giorni fire which was 'only' caused by a mattress. See what happened. Now imagine all those cars underneath catching fire. Has anyone thought about such matters?

Some years ago a home was gutted by a fire caused when a car caught fire due to a short circuit. Everything was burnt and the little I saw of a few belongings brought for cleaning was quite impressive. Fire doesn't respect anyone or anything. In conclusion, yes something has to be done about low rent dwellings, but it certainly cannot be complete liberalisation since we will go from one extreme to another.

Just as people are demanding the regularisation of low rent property, so we too demand the control and regularisation of the property market, whether for sale or letting. Justice must be done all round.

An authority must be set up to look into each and every low rent dwelling, listen to the owners and those living in them, and take the necessary decisions which, I repeat, will be fair and just to all concerned. We are more than sure that no sooner will there be complete liberalisation than most of those same people who are clamouring now for justice will in their turn completely forget what they were asking for and will proceed to charge the sort of prices we see today, take it or leave it.

Then we will have a lot of "sfrattati", which one sometimes hears mentioned on Italian TV but which is also a Maltese word. Then what will happen and who will take responsibility for the "new situation"?